jp4a50 added a comment. In D146101#4195293 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D146101#4195293>, @owenpan wrote:
> Please see > https://clang.llvm.org/docs/ClangFormatStyleOptions.html#adding-additional-style-options. > Is there a way to fix the issue without adding a new option? @owenpan We could simply change the indentation level of designated initializers for everyone to match `IndentWidth` instead of `ContinuationIndentWidth` but I suspect that other users might be unhappy if we made that breaking change? I guess we could also consider making this behaviour only kick in when a specific set of *other* options are specified (e.g. `AlwaysBreak`) so that it applies to our clang-format style and not *all* others but that just feels like a hack. I understand the added complexity and maintenance burden of a new option but we do meet the 3 criteria listed in your link. - it is part of the KJ style guide which is used by the capn proto <https://github.com/capnproto/capnproto> project which has over 100 maintainers - the style guide is publicly accessible here <https://github.com/capnproto/capnproto/blob/master/style-guide.md> - I'm willing to contribute and maintain patches :) I think it's also worth noting that the google style guide <https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html#Designated_initializers> gives an example of designated initializers indented at 2 spaces (whereas their "continuation indent" for wrapped function parameters is 4). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D146101/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D146101 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
